Miami Herald: (April 4, 2001)

1) Betrays the nature of the scientific method and sound research methodology by its 2-line screaming headline with 1" letters: "REVIEW SHOWS BALLOTS SAY BUSH".

2) Isolates one slice of the ballot study pie and touts it as "the conclusion." When the full text of the Herald's (one-of-many) ballot inspection study is read, the data demonstrates that reaching such a headline-grabbing conclusion is premature and intellectually dishonest.

3) Recklessly seeks to mold media reaction and public reaction by foisting a very premature conclusion.

I speak from personal experience -- I have personally inspected ballots. So . . . the best use of our energies in protesting this bias is to be media watch dogs. Knowing that the mass media is likely to spout this story as truth, we must remind them that:

1) You cannot reach a journalistically and intellectually sound conclusion when only part of the studies are completed. The more comprehensive National Opinion Research Center (NORC) study for the consortium of the NY Times, Washington Post, Time, CNN, et. al. is not complete yet.

2) Screaming headlines do not equal truth. Media journalists: Read the whole study, and read other studies completed and underway . . . report the Herald's conclusion as being premature . . . There is more to the story than the Herald reports . . . (One, of many, very important items that needs further investigation is the issue of potentially faulty machines that prevented voters from making a clear punch in the first, presidential election column. There are too many instances of this to prematurely conclude that the only explanation is that all these voters did not wish to vote for president.) Let's stay on top of the spin this story is given by the media.

Aaron M. Cohen